Wrong, Bobert. It is very clear. It is in plain English. It does not differentiate based on the type of weapons. That, I believe, was by intent. The founders were very aware that weapons would evolve and develope. The type of "arms" were not the relevant distinction. They simply said that "the people" have the "right" to "keep and bear arms". The Supreme Court has very correctly determined that the basic right is clear. All this balderdash that others put on it, such as making the distinction between handguns and long guns, is simply them trying to put their rationales on the language. It is not there.

This whole debate revolves around folks with an agenda trying to accomplish something in the courts that they cannot accomplish politically. If they could, they would simply take it to the ballot or to an amendment. The Supreme Court has taken a big step in ending these types of moves. Want to get rid of handguns? Take it to the people, sponsor an amendment. Can't get it done? Right, because most average folks don't support the notion of giving up this basic right.

Mick